3:18 p.m.
This is my wish list for Fedora Core.
1. download and install from cd or dvd (this already works 99.9% of the
time, depending on hardware)
2. Ease of use, ( not for a new Linux user, but getting there)
3. Easy to install new software, (not quite, but very close).
Oh what the hell, Linux will not go anywhere until the hardware
manufacturers will give the end user the option and support for Linux
(be it Fedora, Mandrake, Suse or any other flavour of Linux). As it
stands now Windows (yuck) is the only option. Who says there is no
monopoly on the OS that is installed on, lets say a Dell for arguments
sake, a Notebook. Try to purchase a notebook with no OS, impossible.
About the only way to do that is to buy a build your own desktop PC and
be damned with the likes of Dell, HP/Compaq, and Sony, as well as
others.
Sorry for the ranting and raving, but Linux is the best OS out there, my
choice is Fedora Core, and Windose is the only choice for end users,
poor them. How many people actually know that there is an alternative OS
besides Windose. None, nobody, nada, ziltch. No one promotes it in any
way.
On that note that is my biggest wish, PROMOTE LINUX.
3:44 p.m.
Mike Lurk wrote:
This is my wish list for Fedora Core.
1. download and install from cd or dvd (this already works 99.9% of
the time, depending on hardware)
2. Ease of use, ( not for a new Linux user, but getting there)
3. Easy to install new software, (not quite, but very close).
Oh what the hell, Linux will not go anywhere until the hardware
manufacturers will give the end user the option and support for Linux
(be it Fedora, Mandrake, Suse or any other flavour of Linux). As it
stands now Windows (yuck) is the only option. Who says there is no
monopoly on the OS that is installed on, lets say a Dell for arguments
sake, a Notebook. Try to purchase a notebook with no OS, impossible.
About the only way to do that is to buy a build your own desktop PC
and be damned with the likes of Dell, HP/Compaq, and Sony, as well as
others.
Sorry for the ranting and raving, but Linux is the best OS out there,
my choice is Fedora Core, and Windose is the only choice for end
users, poor them. How many people actually know that there is an
alternative OS besides Windose. None, nobody, nada, ziltch. No one
promotes it in any way.
On that note that is my biggest wish, PROMOTE LINUX.
You've got some fire in you. Subscribe to fedora-marketing-list.
I tend to disagree on some aspects. I think Fedora Core is starting to
be good enough for end users. I sell computers, and offer both Windows
and Linux on them. Some people haven't even heard of Linux or Fedora,
but choose it to save money. Others have heard of Linux but not used
it, and welcome the opportunity to try it out. I have gotten a small
number of questions regarding the differences between the two systems,
but I have not yet had a complaint that some piece of hardware
absolutely would not work (we set up everything before the computer
leaves the shop) and have never had someone dissatisfied with Fedora
Core. I think that's very impressive. You'd be surprised by how many
people have heard of Linux and heard good things. They often just don't
know where to look. BTW, we do sell laptops with no operating system. ;-)
--
Patrick "The N-Man" Barnes
nman64(a)n-man.com
www.n-man.com
--
4:31 p.m.
On Sun, 05 Jun 2005 15:44:57 -0500, Patrick Barnes wrote:
I tend to disagree on some aspects. I think Fedora Core is starting
to
be good enough for end users.
There's real opportunity to market Linux to people coming up - with all
the great work Red Hat/NSA have been doing on security you can actually
say "Linux is fundamentally more secure than Windows, and will remain
secure as it gets popular" and believe it ... security sells, as the
Firefox developers will attest.
Mudflap and SELinux might be slightly weird names but ExecShield is
catchy (props to whoever invented that name!), so why aren't we doing an
Apple: giving them ambiguous glowing balls for logos and slapping them on
the website?
That said, currently two problems that would stop me installing Fedora
for very non-technical users:
- Auto update is not reliable/graphical enough, or never has been for me.
Maybe it's fixed in FC4.
- Auto update breaks nvidia drivers every few weeks
If Fedora was more like Ubuntu in these aspects (fully graphical/automatic
auto update, supporting nvidia drivers out of the box) I'd be confident
enough to install it for a friend and then go away on holiday or
whatever, and not come back expecting trouble. Wouldn't necessarily be
*liked*, but wouldn't actually break (I'm talking from experience of
doing exactly that here). Need better MSN support and maybe a faster
OpenOffice to be really comfortable.
For users who are perhaps confident with computers but not technical, ie
your average teenager/20something the other issues would be:
- Too hard to install new software (this is what autopackage is for)
- Hard to get supported wireless hardware
- Games
- L33t apps like Picasa, iTunes etc. I'd need to install Wine/Crossover
for them myself. It's not supported by Fedora out of the box (yeah yeah
I'm biased ;)
At least, those are the problems I've encountered before when friends have
wanted to try Linux/Fedora before. Nothing insurmountable!
thanks -mike
4:36 p.m.
On 6/5/05, Mike Hearn <mike(a)navi.cx> wrote:
- Auto update is not reliable/graphical enough, or never has been for
me.
Maybe it's fixed in FC4.
- Auto update breaks nvidia drivers every few weeks
breaks the nvidia drivers.... installed from rpms?
now that dkms is in extras... i really hope the packagers of the
nvidia rpms look into it as making it easier to avoid updating
problems.
-jef
4:58 p.m.
On Sun, 05 Jun 2005 17:36:08 -0400, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
breaks the nvidia drivers.... installed from rpms?
Yeah. Even then. I'm not sure what happened but at some point the livna
nvidia RPMs just stopped updating, and yum went ahead and upgraded the
kernel anyway. It's been doing that ever since. I just pin it in grub
these days.
thanks -mike
6:37 p.m.
On Sun, Jun 05, 2005 at 05:36:08PM -0400, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
On 6/5/05, Mike Hearn <mike(a)navi.cx> wrote:
> - Auto update is not reliable/graphical enough, or never has been for me.
> Maybe it's fixed in FC4.
> - Auto update breaks nvidia drivers every few weeks
breaks the nvidia drivers.... installed from rpms?
now that dkms is in extras... i really hope the packagers of the
nvidia rpms look into it as making it easier to avoid updating
problems.
John Hull from Dell has packaged up the NVidia drivers that we release
for our Precision workstations, using DKMS.
ftp://ftp.dell.com/video/
dell-nvidia-7167-5dkms.src.rpm
dell-nvidia-7167-multiarch-5.tar.gz
I don't know where he's at with getting NVidia do to this work for
him, but as long as we've got to do it, it'll get done...
Thanks,
Matt
--
Matt Domsch
Software Architect
Dell Linux Solutions linux.dell.com & www.dell.com/linux
Linux on Dell mailing lists @ http://lists.us.dell.com
6:57 p.m.
New subject: NVidia RPMs from Dell (Re: Wish list)
On 6/5/05, Matt Domsch <Matt_Domsch(a)dell.com> wrote:
John Hull from Dell has packaged up the NVidia drivers that we
release
for our Precision workstations, using DKMS.
ftp://ftp.dell.com/video/
dell-nvidia-7167-5dkms.src.rpm
dell-nvidia-7167-multiarch-5.tar.gz
Hmm... well, I'm not an expert or anything, but doing this in %post is
probably sub-.. er... optimal. :)
#Remove existing GL libraries
rm -rf /usr/X11R6/lib/libGL.* > /dev/null 2>&1
rm -rf /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/extensions/libGLcore.* > /dev/null 2>&1
rm -rf /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/extensions/libglx.a > /dev/null 2>&1
rm -rf /usr/X11R6/lib64/libGL.* > /dev/null 2>&1
rm -rf /usr/X11R6/lib64/modules/extensions/libGLcore.* > /dev/null 2>&1
rm -rf /usr/X11R6/lib64/modules/extensions/libglx.a > /dev/null 2>&1
...if only because all of this will be undone the next time
xorg-x11-Mesa-libGL is updated.
I know I'm mildly offtopic for this list, but I thought I'd mention
it, seeing as this package is likely to be installed by lots and lots
of people using Fedora. You are far better off obsoleting
xorg-x11-Mesa-libGL.
No, seriously, this is BAD (TM).
Cheers,
--
Konstantin Ryabitsev
Zlotniks, INC
"Выслухаў мядзьведзь казку і адарваў сабе хвост."
3:28 a.m.
New subject: NVidia RPMs from Dell (Re: Wish list)
On Sun, 2005-06-05 at 19:57 -0400, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote:
On 6/5/05, Matt Domsch <Matt_Domsch(a)dell.com> wrote:
> John Hull from Dell has packaged up the NVidia drivers that we release
> for our Precision workstations, using DKMS.
>
> ftp://ftp.dell.com/video/
> dell-nvidia-7167-5dkms.src.rpm
> dell-nvidia-7167-multiarch-5.tar.gz
Hmm... well, I'm not an expert or anything, but doing this in %post is
probably sub-.. er... optimal. :)
#Remove existing GL libraries
rm -rf /usr/X11R6/lib/libGL.* > /dev/null 2>&1
rm -rf /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/extensions/libGLcore.* > /dev/null 2>&1
rm -rf /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/extensions/libglx.a > /dev/null 2>&1
rm -rf /usr/X11R6/lib64/libGL.* > /dev/null 2>&1
rm -rf /usr/X11R6/lib64/modules/extensions/libGLcore.* > /dev/null 2>&1
rm -rf /usr/X11R6/lib64/modules/extensions/libglx.a > /dev/null 2>&1
John should look at how livna packages the nvidia drivers (enabling one
to install it cleanly along the normal GL libraries), the above is just
tasteless ;-).
Nils
--
Nils Philippsen / Red Hat / nphilipp(a)redhat.com
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- B. Franklin, 1759
PGP fingerprint: C4A8 9474 5C4C ADE3 2B8F 656D 47D8 9B65 6951 3011
1:56 a.m.
On Sun, 2005-06-05 at 18:37 -0500, Matt Domsch wrote:
On Sun, Jun 05, 2005 at 05:36:08PM -0400, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On 6/5/05, Mike Hearn <mike(a)navi.cx> wrote:
> > - Auto update is not reliable/graphical enough, or never has been for me.
> > Maybe it's fixed in FC4.
> > - Auto update breaks nvidia drivers every few weeks
>
> breaks the nvidia drivers.... installed from rpms?
>
> now that dkms is in extras... i really hope the packagers of the
> nvidia rpms look into it as making it easier to avoid updating
> problems.
John Hull from Dell has packaged up the NVidia drivers that we release
for our Precision workstations, using DKMS.
ftp://ftp.dell.com/video/
does this mean that everyone on this list can call Dell support when
they have any nvidia issues? I can imagine that being more pleasant than
the nvidia forums...
2:27 a.m.
Hi
There's real opportunity to market Linux to people coming up -
with all
the great work Red Hat/NSA have been doing on security you can actually
say "Linux is fundamentally more secure than Windows, and will remain
secure as it gets popular" and believe it ... security sells, as the
Firefox developers will attest.
Mudflap and SELinux might be slightly weird names but ExecShield is
catchy (props to whoever invented that name!), so why aren't we doing an
Apple: giving them ambiguous glowing balls for logos and slapping them on
the website?
agreed. There needs to be more marketing done here. It helps educate
people on the benefits not to mention other side benefits like actually
selling the product ;-). For Fedora, do join the Fedora Marketing list
if you have some creative ideas
regards
Rahul
2:38 a.m.
That said, currently two problems that would stop me installing Fedora
for very non-technical users:
- Auto update is not reliable/graphical enough, or never has been for me.
Maybe it's fixed in FC4.
- Auto update breaks nvidia drivers every few weeks
well the moment you use the (probably illegal) nvidia binary drivers you
gave up all advantages of open source already. Especially on the
security front, binary drivers have a really bad reputation and history
there.
If Fedora was more like Ubuntu in these aspects (fully graphical/automatic
auto update, supporting nvidia drivers out of the box) I'd be confident
enough to install it for a friend and then go away on holiday or
whatever, and not come back expecting trouble.
so don't install the binary drivers.
4:20 p.m.
Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>That said, currently two problems that would stop me installing
Fedora
>for very non-technical users:
>
>- Auto update is not reliable/graphical enough, or never has been for me.
> Maybe it's fixed in FC4.
>- Auto update breaks nvidia drivers every few weeks
well the moment you use the (probably illegal) nvidia binary drivers you
gave up all advantages of open source already. Especially on the
security front, binary drivers have a really bad reputation and history
there.
People love Fedora, and people love Nvidia drivers. Both for good reasons.
You'll have to accept that eventually, instead of systematically bad-mouthing
every person that brings up Nvidia issues on this mailing list.
-denis
4:23 p.m.
>
> well the moment you use the (probably illegal) nvidia binary drivers you
> gave up all advantages of open source already. Especially on the
> security front, binary drivers have a really bad reputation and history
> there.
People love Fedora, and people love Nvidia drivers. Both for good reasons.
You'll have to accept that eventually, instead of systematically bad-mouthing
every person that brings up Nvidia issues on this mailing list.
He's not bad-mouthing the person. He's bad-mouthing the driver.
And he's hardly doing it systematically.
seriously - nvidia drivers being bad for your system is not new. You
should have seen this before.
-sv
2:57 p.m.
On 6/6/05, seth vidal <skvidal(a)phy.duke.edu> wrote:
> >
> > well the moment you use the (probably illegal) nvidia binary drivers you
> > gave up all advantages of open source already. Especially on the
> > security front, binary drivers have a really bad reputation and history
> > there.
>
> People love Fedora, and people love Nvidia drivers. Both for good reasons.
> You'll have to accept that eventually, instead of systematically bad-mouthing
> every person that brings up Nvidia issues on this mailing list.
He's not bad-mouthing the person. He's bad-mouthing the driver.
And he's hardly doing it systematically.
seriously - nvidia drivers being bad for your system is not new. You
should have seen this before.
Don't see why they can be bad for my system: I've never had problems
with them (even when CONFIG_PREEMPT and CONFIG_4K_STACKS), have been
using them for more than 3 months with all unstable/testing kernel
releases up to 2.6.12-rc6 and performance is exceptional with them
loaded.
3:41 p.m.
New subject: OT: nVidia driver [was: Wish list]
On Tue, June 7, 2005 3:57 pm, Felipe Alfaro Solana said:
Don't see why they can be bad for my system: I've never had problems with
them (even when CONFIG_PREEMPT and CONFIG_4K_STACKS), have been using them
for more than 3 months with all unstable/testing kernel releases up to
2.6.12-rc6 and performance is exceptional with them loaded.
People should probably take the word of those who have been bringing Linux
to the world for many years over someone who has been experimenting for 3
months.
For anyone with valuable data on their system, it's very bad advice to go
anywhere near binary drivers. For those with nothing worthwhile on their
system, and no concept of how and why Linux was created, go nuts.
Sean
4:04 p.m.
New subject: OT: nVidia driver [was: Wish list]
On 6/7/05, Sean <seanlkml(a)sympatico.ca> wrote:
On Tue, June 7, 2005 3:57 pm, Felipe Alfaro Solana said:
> Don't see why they can be bad for my system: I've never had problems with
> them (even when CONFIG_PREEMPT and CONFIG_4K_STACKS), have been using them
> for more than 3 months with all unstable/testing kernel releases up to
> 2.6.12-rc6 and performance is exceptional with them loaded.
People should probably take the word of those who have been bringing Linux
to the world for many years over someone who has been experimenting for 3
months.
I wasn't trying to take away the credit that Linux kernel developers
deserve. I was simply stating my personal experience with nVidia
propietary drivers, nothing else.
4:38 p.m.
New subject: OT: nVidia driver [was: Wish list]
On Tue, 2005-06-07 at 16:41 -0400, Sean wrote:
On Tue, June 7, 2005 3:57 pm, Felipe Alfaro Solana said:
>
> Don't see why they can be bad for my system: I've never had problems with
> them (even when CONFIG_PREEMPT and CONFIG_4K_STACKS), have been using them
> for more than 3 months with all unstable/testing kernel releases up to
> 2.6.12-rc6 and performance is exceptional with them loaded.
People should probably take the word of those who have been bringing Linux
to the world for many years over someone who has been experimenting for 3
months.
For anyone with valuable data on their system, it's very bad advice to go
anywhere near binary drivers. For those with nothing worthwhile on their
system, and no concept of how and why Linux was created, go nuts.
Sean
The people who bring linux to the world need to stop bitching about
Nvidia who is the only game in town when it comes to commercial quality
video drivers for linux. I've used Nvidia's binaries since they were
first released on dozens of systems running dozens of different kernels
and 4 generations of nvidia chipsets. Never ONCE has their driver
caused instability in these systems.
Nvidia is way off topic on this board anyway. People should ask nvidia
for support not the OS developers. That is why they have a bulletin
board for asking questions and why they have a support email address on
their site.
Next time someone posts having problems with the driver send em to
nvidia's site. Done.
4:53 p.m.
New subject: OT: nVidia driver [was: Wish list]
On Tue, June 7, 2005 5:38 pm, Matthew Lenz said:
The people who bring linux to the world need to stop bitching about
Nvidia who is the only game in town when it comes to commercial quality
video drivers for linux. I've used Nvidia's binaries since they were
first released on dozens of systems running dozens of different kernels
and 4 generations of nvidia chipsets. Never ONCE has their driver
caused instability in these systems.
No, the people who use Linux for free without a clue should wake up and
listen to the people who created the bloody OS instead of agnostic
johnny-come-lately's.
Nvidia is way off topic on this board anyway. People should ask
nvidia
for support not the OS developers. That is why they have a bulletin
board for asking questions and why they have a support email address on
their site.
Next time someone posts having problems with the driver send em to
nvidia's site. Done.
If you're going to undermine the integrity of your system and the open
source process at the same time, you're better off just going back and
using Windows. Actually, do whatever you want personally, but don't
spread this bad advice here.
Sean
5:19 p.m.
New subject: OT: nVidia driver [was: Wish list]
Sean wrote:
On Tue, June 7, 2005 5:38 pm, Matthew Lenz said:
If you're going to undermine the integrity of your system and the open
source process at the same time, you're better off just going back and
using Windows. Actually, do whatever you want personally, but don't
spread this bad advice here.
That's a very naive thing to say. You can't deny the fact that people want
graphics hardware acceleration for various reasons, whether it's games, video
apps or openGL development. Now F/OSS can't provide that, at least not yet,
and not well enough. Not everyone uses the NVidia driver by choice. And if you
think their driver is a pain to deal with, don't ever try to get a USB
wireless device working. I need this for one of my boxes and I have to deal
with the infamous linux-wlan driver, an absolute piece of garbage that doesn't
even implement the wireless extensions and is riddled with SMP race conditions
:-( Unfortunately, it's the only way to get some 3-year old USB wireless
receivers to work (anything newer isn't supported). Now you can't say it's my
fault for needing USB-based wireless connectivity (it's not my fault is the
media box i use has no PCI slots). I'm the first to agree it's all NVidia's
fault for not releasing their entire driver under the GPL. Maybe if the
companies that owned the most powerful Linux distros were to put some pressure
on them...
-denis
5:44 p.m.
New subject: OT: nVidia driver [was: Wish list]
On Tue, June 7, 2005 6:19 pm, Denis Leroy said:
Sean wrote:
> On Tue, June 7, 2005 5:38 pm, Matthew Lenz said:
> If you're going to undermine the integrity of your system and the open
> source process at the same time, you're better off just going back and
> using Windows. Actually, do whatever you want personally, but don't
> spread this bad advice here.
That's a very naive thing to say. You can't deny the fact that people want
graphics hardware acceleration for various reasons, whether it's games,
video
apps or openGL development. Now F/OSS can't provide that, at least not
yet,
and not well enough. Not everyone uses the NVidia driver by choice. And if
you
think their driver is a pain to deal with, don't ever try to get a USB
wireless device working. I need this for one of my boxes and I have to
deal
with the infamous linux-wlan driver, an absolute piece of garbage that
doesn't
even implement the wireless extensions and is riddled with SMP race
conditions
:-( Unfortunately, it's the only way to get some 3-year old USB wireless
receivers to work (anything newer isn't supported). Now you can't say it's
my
fault for needing USB-based wireless connectivity (it's not my fault is
the
media box i use has no PCI slots). I'm the first to agree it's all
NVidia's
fault for not releasing their entire driver under the GPL. Maybe if the
companies that owned the most powerful Linux distros were to put some
pressure
on them...
Frankly, the power of a few distros is nothing compared to the power of
more people waking up to what is at stake in the decisions they make.
There are way too many apologists for nVidia et. al. Most of these
people don't have a clue about how Linux managed to get where it is today.
That's fine, but it doesn't mean we have to let their bad advice go by
without comment.
It's pretty annoying listening to all the newcomers unthinkingly thumb
their nose at what got us to where we are today. You simply can't move
Linux forward by undermining exactly what makes it important and
successful.
Anyway, choosing a binary driver has real risks involved. If you value
the data in your computer, you understand the open source process, and
you're thankful for the great O/S that you find yourself using; the
decisions become rather easy.
Signing-off,
Sean.
6:02 p.m.
New subject: OT: nVidia driver [was: Wish list]
Sean wrote:
It's pretty annoying listening to all the newcomers unthinkingly
thumb
their nose at what got us to where we are today. You simply can't move
Linux forward by undermining exactly what makes it important and
successful.
I don't know who you're calling newcomers, but there are plenty of Linux
veterans, including myself, who don't share your opinion.
Anyway, choosing a binary driver has real risks involved. If you
value
the data in your computer, you understand the open source process, and
you're thankful for the great O/S that you find yourself using; the
decisions become rather easy.
My points was, you can only choose if there's an alternative. There are no
serious alternatives to the Nvidia binary driver, and that's not my fault.
-denis
7:21 p.m.
New subject: OT: nVidia driver [was: Wish list]
Why so angry. I think that you should really get off the religious
kick. I for one have been using Linux for an extremely long time. I
also use the Nvidia propritary drivers. Why you ask? Because open or
closed they are clearly the best drivers for X. For most people who
do actual work on their boxes, functionality matters more than a
religious kick :-) . Also I want to run the latest hardware & not
something that is 7 years old with crappy performance, just to say
that my system is all open source. We have all asked Nvidia to open
there drivers, but they insit on staying closed source. Since they
keep up with kernel releases & fix the drivers when there are breaks,
I personally have just gotten used to it. I install them and I don't
have any problems. There drivers clearly surpass all drivers in X when
it comes to features. Maybe one day Nvidia will wake up and release
there drivers open source, but until then I have as of yet to see
anyone who can match their drviers...especially ATI.
On 6/7/05, Sean <seanlkml(a)sympatico.ca> wrote:
On Tue, June 7, 2005 6:19 pm, Denis Leroy said:
> Sean wrote:
>> On Tue, June 7, 2005 5:38 pm, Matthew Lenz said:
> > If you're going to undermine the integrity of your system and the open
>> source process at the same time, you're better off just going back and
>> using Windows. Actually, do whatever you want personally, but don't
>> spread this bad advice here.
>
> That's a very naive thing to say. You can't deny the fact that people want
> graphics hardware acceleration for various reasons, whether it's games,
> video
> apps or openGL development. Now F/OSS can't provide that, at least not
> yet,
> and not well enough. Not everyone uses the NVidia driver by choice. And if
> you
> think their driver is a pain to deal with, don't ever try to get a USB
> wireless device working. I need this for one of my boxes and I have to
> deal
> with the infamous linux-wlan driver, an absolute piece of garbage that
> doesn't
> even implement the wireless extensions and is riddled with SMP race
> conditions
> :-( Unfortunately, it's the only way to get some 3-year old USB wireless
> receivers to work (anything newer isn't supported). Now you can't say
it's
> my
> fault for needing USB-based wireless connectivity (it's not my fault is
> the
> media box i use has no PCI slots). I'm the first to agree it's all
> NVidia's
> fault for not releasing their entire driver under the GPL. Maybe if the
> companies that owned the most powerful Linux distros were to put some
> pressure
> on them...
Frankly, the power of a few distros is nothing compared to the power of
more people waking up to what is at stake in the decisions they make.
There are way too many apologists for nVidia et. al. Most of these
people don't have a clue about how Linux managed to get where it is today.
That's fine, but it doesn't mean we have to let their bad advice go by
without comment.
It's pretty annoying listening to all the newcomers unthinkingly thumb
their nose at what got us to where we are today. You simply can't move
Linux forward by undermining exactly what makes it important and
successful.
Anyway, choosing a binary driver has real risks involved. If you value
the data in your computer, you understand the open source process, and
you're thankful for the great O/S that you find yourself using; the
decisions become rather easy.
Signing-off,
Sean.
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list(a)redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
8:03 p.m.
New subject: OT: nVidia driver [was: Wish list]
On 6/7/05, Jerone Young <jerone(a)gmail.com> wrote:
but until then I have as of yet to see
anyone who can match their drviers...especially ATI.
Well duh, of course ATI isnt going to have good drivers for your nvidia card.
Lame jokes aside... do you know exactly how responsible nvidia is for
the state of nv driver development that is available as part of X?
Perhaps, more than perhaps.. nv could also be claimed as their driver
too. Maybe the disparity in functionality between the nv driver and
the closed nvidia driver is delibrate. Maybe the developers provided
as much functionality in the open nv driver as the feel they can do
and its not so much a decision that the engineers are actively making
as it is a set of legal opinions and or business decisions
constraining their actions. Or maybe they are just twisted evil
dwarves who like watching the drivers break as the kernel development
churns forward.
-jef
8:22 p.m.
New subject: OT: nVidia driver [was: Wish list]
On 6/7/05, Jeff Spaleta <jspaleta(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 6/7/05, Jerone Young <jerone(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> but until then I have as of yet to see
> anyone who can match their drviers...especially ATI.
Well duh, of course ATI isnt going to have good drivers for your nvidia card.
Dude I was referring to all drivers...ATI having very bad drivers (the
proprietary ones). While Nvidia having good drivers :-)
Lame jokes aside... do you know exactly how responsible nvidia is
for
the state of nv driver development that is available as part of X?
Since I havne not actively kept up with nv development I really don't.
I don't believe they work on the nv driver any, just pass on the
specs to someone to support the card. All nvidia cards work with the
nv driver with 2d only just fine (minus some optimized acceleration
for overlay).
Perhaps, more than perhaps.. nv could also be claimed as their
driver
too. Maybe the disparity in functionality between the nv driver and
the closed nvidia driver is delibrate.
Yes somewhat. Most of the functionality is 3D related. There are also
TwinView & other nvidiaish things that are not in the nv driver. I
don't like it, but inspite of what people have told Nvidia. They
still do it this way.
Maybe the developers provided
as much functionality in the open nv driver as the feel they can do
and its not so much a decision that the engineers are actively making
as it is a set of legal opinions and or business decisions
constraining their actions.
From posts on the nvidia linux forum the developers are held back
mainly by legal reasons. S3TC compression is patented and they can't
just give out that code without permission. Also they claim there are
a bunch of trade secrets in there code...optimized algorithms and
such. I really don't buy it all that much. I don't see why they
couldn't release the driver open source & there GL libraries closed.
But it mainly has to do with lawyers.
Or maybe they are just twisted evil
dwarves who like watching the drivers break as the kernel development
churns forward.
Actually the developers are and they know it. They also know that no
one has any pity on them as Nvidia has chosen the hardest path to
follow.
-jef
8:32 p.m.
New subject: OT: nVidia driver [was: Wish list]
On 6/7/05, Jerone Young <jerone(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Since I havne not actively kept up with nv development I really
don't.
I don't believe they work on the nv driver any, just pass on the
specs to someone to support the card.
I think you should go check through the history of the nv driver.
You'll be amazed at whom is doing the large scale changes and perhaps
shocked when you find their name@nvidia as an email address. hell
just grep through the /usr/share/doc/xorg-x11-6.8.2/CHANGELOG for nv
highlighted references and you'll get a much better feel as to long
term historic nature of nvidia's involvement with nv driver
development.
-jef
12:07 p.m.
New subject: OT: nVidia driver [was: Wish list]
Jeff Spaleta wrote:
do you know exactly how responsible nvidia is for
the state of nv driver development that is available as part of X?
Perhaps, more than perhaps.. nv could also be claimed as their driver
too. Maybe the disparity in functionality between the nv driver and
the closed nvidia driver is delibrate. Maybe the developers provided
as much functionality in the open nv driver as the feel they can do
and its not so much a decision that the engineers are actively making
as it is a set of legal opinions and or business decisions
constraining their actions. Or maybe they are just twisted evil
dwarves who like watching the drivers break as the kernel development
churns forward.
That's an interesting point to consider, but you have to understand that
NVidia is a company, and therefore is only interested in two things: profits
and market share. All NVidia wants is to own the Linux market share (and they
pretty much do), because even if it's only half a percent or so of the desktop
market, it's half a percent they would rather own over ATI in the
ultra-competitive graphics market. With that perspective in mind, it makes no
sense from a business point of view for NVidia to somehow deliberately
sabotage or slow down the progress of the nv GPL driver: after all their
closed-source driver is free, all they want is for linux people to buy their
cards... It's also in their best interest to have a solid GPL unaccelerated nv
driver in Xorg, so that things like graphics installer will work...
-denis
4:16 p.m.
New subject: OT: nVidia driver [was: Wish list]
Le mercredi 08 juin 2005 à 10:07 -0700, Denis Leroy a écrit :
That's an interesting point to consider, but you have to
understand that
NVidia is a company, and therefore is only interested in two things: profits
and market share. All NVidia wants is to own the Linux market share
Well an open driver would get them there instantaneously. Matrox pretty
much owned the Linux market back when the G400 had a complete open
driver.
--
Nicolas Mailhot
5:59 a.m.
New subject: OT: nVidia driver [was: Wish list]
On Tue, 2005-06-07 at 15:19 -0700, Denis Leroy wrote:
That's a very naive thing to say. You can't deny the fact
that people want
graphics hardware acceleration for various reasons, whether it's games, video
apps or openGL development.
And you can't deny the fact that NVidia wants to hold that control ove
the user.
Now F/OSS can't provide that, at least not yet,
and not well enough.
Actually, it is NVidia who pretty much makes it near to impossible, and
not lack of developer quality.
Rui
--
+ No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown
+ Whatever you do will be insignificant,
| but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi
+ So let's do it...?
Please AVOID sending me WORD, EXCEL or POWERPOINT attachments.
See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
7:40 a.m.
On Sun, 05 Jun 2005 22:31:31 +0100, Mike Hearn wrote:
- Auto update breaks nvidia drivers every few weeks
I guess I should have added that this affects the open source NTFS drivers
too. This isn't a black/white thing to do with proprietary vs open source
drivers - anything that Red Hat choose not to ship for whatever reason
(which they usually keep secret) is affected by it :/
7:47 a.m.
Mike Hearn wrote:
On Sun, 05 Jun 2005 22:31:31 +0100, Mike Hearn wrote:
>- Auto update breaks nvidia drivers every few weeks
>
>
I guess I should have added that this affects the open source NTFS drivers
too. This isn't a black/white thing to do with proprietary vs open source
drivers - anything that Red Hat choose not to ship for whatever reason
(which they usually keep secret) is affected by it :/
One of the proposed goals for FC5 [1] is to provide to mechanism to
package external kernel modules in a way that would keep them in sync
and working together, so for GPL'ed kernel modules not include in the
Fedora kernel or for modules where the proprietary vendor allows
repackaging and redistribution this planned infrastructure could solve
the problem
regards
Rahul
[1] http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/FC5Future
12:36 p.m.
Mike Hearn <mike(a)navi.cx> wrote:
On Sun, 05 Jun 2005 22:31:31 +0100, Mike Hearn wrote:
> - Auto update breaks nvidia drivers every few weeks
I guess I should have added that this affects the open source NTFS
drivers
too. This isn't a black/white thing to do with proprietary vs open source
drivers - anything that Red Hat choose not to ship for whatever reason
(which they usually keep secret) is affected by it :/
I'm not happy either, but I can understand the (probable) reason behind
this: If you are in doubt that shipping $SOMETHING might be illegal, better
just don't ship and shut up. That way $THEY can't later claim that RH
warned the community about the legal problem, that RH considered breaking
the law (now /that/ would make SCOXes day! not that such considering and
deciding not to do it because of whatever reasons (including legal ones)
must be commonplace...), and/or that RH agrees with them that shipping
$SOMETHING is illegal or whatever.
AFAIU in the case of NTFS it is that as there is no write support (just
picture at all the users screaming they can't write to their Hasefroch
partition...), and using the alternative (Win drivers via captive) might be
legally dubious, better abstain completely.
--
Dr. Horst H. von Brand User #22616 counter.li.org
Departamento de Informatica Fono: +56 32 654431
Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria +56 32 654239
Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile Fax: +56 32 797513
6919
days inactive
6922
days old
30 comments
18 participants
participants (18)
-
Arjan van de Ven -
Denis Leroy -
Felipe Alfaro Solana -
Horst H. von Brand -
Jef Spaleta -
Jerone Young -
Konstantin Ryabitsev -
Matt Domsch -
Matthew Lenz -
Mike Hearn -
MIKE LURK -
Nicolas Mailhot -
Nils Philippsen -
Patrick W. Barnes -
Rahul Sundaram -
Rui Miguel Silva Seabra -
Sean -
seth vidal